By T N Ashok
For much of the 1950s and 1960s, Indian cinema sold dreams through storytelling, music and acting talent. Beauty mattered, certainly, but actresses such as Madhubala, Meena Kumari, Waheeda Rehman, Vyjayanthimala, Asha Parekh and Mala Sinha became stars primarily because of their performances. The camera admired them, but rarely reduced them. Their screen presence rested on expressive acting, dance skills, emotional range and charisma. The heroines were central to the narrative rather than decorative additions to it.
Yet by the 1970s, a dramatic transformation had begun. As colour cinema expanded, audiences fragmented and competition intensified, producers increasingly discovered that sexuality could be packaged and sold. Commercial cinema started placing greater emphasis on spectacle. The emergence of cabaret culture transformed actresses like Helen into cultural phenomena. Helen’s dances became box-office attractions in their own right.
Soon, filmmakers realized there was money in what critics later called the “male gaze”—the deliberate use of camera angles, costumes and choreography designed to eroticize the female body. The cabaret performer became an essential ingredient in mainstream cinema. The trend deepened during the late 1970s and 1980s. Stars such as Zeenat Aman and Parveen Babi challenged conservative norms and projected a modern image. While many of their performances were artistically significant, filmmakers increasingly marketed glamour as aggressively as acting talent.
By the 1990s, liberalization changed Indian entertainment forever. Satellite television, music channels and global advertising altered the economics of cinema. Songs became promotional tools. A successful song could generate publicity months before a film’s release. Producers discovered that a glamorous dance sequence often delivered greater marketing value than an expensive dramatic scene. The result was the rise of the “item number.”
Unlike earlier dance performances woven into a narrative, item songs often existed primarily to attract attention. Their commercial purpose was explicit: increase visibility, boost music sales, create television buzz and pull audiences into theatres. Actresses and dancers became the centrepieces of this strategy. From the late 1990s through the 2010s, performers such as Malaika Arora, Katrina Kaif, Bipasha Basu and others became associated with blockbuster dance numbers that were often promoted as heavily as the films themselves.
Regional cinema followed similar patterns. Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam and Bhojpuri industries all experienced periods where glamour became a commercial formula. Producers openly budgeted for special songs featuring guest performers. In some industries, a separate allocation existed specifically for promotional dance numbers designed to maximize opening-weekend collections.
Yet the industry’s defenders offered a counterargument. Many directors maintained that actresses were exercising agency, choosing roles and performances that enhanced their careers. They argued that glamour had always been part of cinema and that audiences—not filmmakers alone—drove demand.
Critics disagreed. Feminist scholars and media analysts argued that actresses frequently faced unequal standards. Male stars could age into character roles while retaining narrative importance. Female stars often found their market value tied disproportionately to youth, appearance and physical presentation. The debate became even more complex after the #MeToo movement reached India.
For decades, allegations of the “casting couch” circulated through film industries across the country. Many stories remained whispers because of power imbalances. Beginning in the late 2010s, several actresses publicly discussed experiences involving coercion, harassment and professional pressure. Some prominent filmmakers, producers and industry figures faced accusations, investigations or court proceedings. While not every allegation resulted in conviction, the movement fundamentally changed the conversation. The issue was no longer merely about costumes or dance sequences. It became a broader discussion about consent, workplace power and exploitation.
Today, in 2026, the industry occupies an uneasy middle ground. On one hand, streaming platforms have expanded opportunities for female-led narratives. Actresses increasingly headline projects based on performance rather than glamour. Strong roles have emerged across Hindi and regional cinema. Audiences have embraced stories where women are protagonists rather than accessories. On the other hand, commercial pressures remain powerful. Social media has created a new ecosystem where promotional clips, fashion appearances and viral dance sequences generate enormous attention. The economics may have changed, but visibility still drives business.
Recent criticism surrounding filmmaker Buchi Babu Sana and the promotional imagery involving actress Janhvi Kapoor illustrates how sensitive the issue has become. Social media users increasingly scrutinize camera framing, costume choices and marketing strategies. What might once have passed without comment now triggers intense public debate within hours.
That scrutiny reflects a larger cultural shift. The question confronting Indian cinema is no longer whether glamour belongs on screen. It always has. The question is whether female performers are being presented as complete artists or primarily as visual commodities.
The contrast between the eras is revealing. The generation of Madhubala, Meena Kumari and Waheeda Rehman became immortal through performances. Later decades often rewarded visibility as much as talent. Today’s industry is attempting to reconcile both realities. Cinema has always reflected society’s desires and contradictions. The history of Indian film is therefore not simply a story of exploitation or liberation. It is the story of an industry constantly negotiating the line between art and commerce, performance and objectification, stardom and sexuality.
More than seventy years after the golden age, that negotiation remains unfinished. (IPA Service)
